Slashdot Mirror
Assange Requests Asylum In Ecuador
david.emery writes "Julian Assange, his appeals in the United Kingdom having run out, today went to the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to request asylum from his pending extradition to Sweden to face questioning for 'unlawful coercion and sexual misconduct including rape.'"
Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa is a friend of Venezuela and Cuba--and NO FRIEND of the U.S.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Well, it's not the first time the swedish government bows before their master: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/default.aspx?pageid=438&n=egyptian-deported-from-sweden-by-cia-freed-2011-08-11
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
Is he really that afraid that he won't get a fair trial - in Sweden?!?
No, he's not *afraid* of it. He *knows* it. This whole thing was such an obvious setup from the get-go that I'm surprised the CIA had the balls to even try it. Shit, even Dominique Strauss-Kahn was less obvious than this mess.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Is he really that afraid that he won't get a fair trial - in Sweden?!?
The charges were dropped, then mysteriously the investigation was reopened. If you had sent copies of the secrets of the world's most powerful government to everyone else, would you not be a little nervous about unusual criminal proceedings?
Palm trees and 8
the "not wearing a condom" charge
Are you really naive enough to believe that's what ANY of this is about?
I mean, seriously?
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
What makes you think he'd ever face trial if he ended up in Sweden? Sweden has illegally rendered political refugees to the US to be tortured in the past. What makes you think they wouldn't do the same to Assange?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
The CIA has apparently gotten away from that (especially with public figures). Public discrediting works just as effectively, doesn't leave behind a martyr, and isn't as obvious. So if some asshole is criticizing the value of the U.S. dollar, you don't send up a guy with a gun to his room, you send up a maid shaking her ass. Much cleaner that any bullet to the head, and just as effective.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
>>>Are you really naive enough to believe that's what ANY of this is about?
I guess I am. Prove to me that something more nefarious is going on with this Sweden Condom Non-wearing case?
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Yes, some of us are really that naive.
Sweden is very liberal about the protection of women and what should constitute sexual abuse. He was a big name, and he broke the law to the point he used his influence to do things that would get other men arrested too. And then instead of answering the charges, he fled the country. Over something that might get him $1000 in fines and told not to come back to the country.
In most countries, what he did would be considered douchebaggery of the highest proportions. In Sweden, they find it criminal...even if it is pretty much a slap on the wrist. When a big name does it, they need to make an example...and the example is he pays a fine much smaller than he has wasted in lawyers so far and goes home. He could have taken care of this months ago, but he wanted to stay in the public eye and pretend that he was oppressed. I wish I could fuck one woman, convince her to drop me off at another woman's home. Fuck her without a condom after telling her I was wearing one, and then go back to the first and pull my condom off halfway through and brag about it...while having half the world look at me as if I'm a political prisoner for doing so...and probably fuck another dozen women in the process.
Gotta hand it to him...he knows how to play others. Are you so naive to think that a man so skilled at manipulation isn't manipulating you?
(BTW I think the US would LOVE to have him in custody, but we all know that he committed no crimes in the US. Treason is not a crime if you aren't a citizen...regardless of what Republicans would like to have you believe)
Way to drink the kool-aid. That or you are astro turfing.
He's not even being charged by the women involved anymore. The women suddenly wanted to charge him AFTER they were approached by a swedish prosecutor. They later attempted to drop the charges, were told they couldn't, eventually succeeded in dropping the charges, only to have the charges somehow re-instituted by a swedish prosecutor with known high up US ties under pressure from the swedish government.
This is all as reported by the SWEDISH Press. Stop fucking astro-turfing to attempt to cover this shit up. This is the most blatant abuse of power by the US over its allies I've ever seen.
Who died because of his actions? Name a single person who died. Link to a single story in a reputable newspaper that details how someone lost their life as a result of leaks he published.
I live and Sweden and everything you type (and belive) about Sweden is wrong; the only thing you are right about is that Assange is a douchbag.
Getting convicted for ANY violent crime in Sweden with out a confession is very uncommon. We have several cases of murder where all the partisipants have gone free since it has been impossible to prove which one of the accused delivered the killing blow, and they have been convicted of desecrating a corpse since it was impossible to prove that the person was alive when they delivered their blow. A few years back we had a guy who was equitted of rape since he was the last one in the gang rape to have sex with the girl. When it was his turn she was so chocked that she was paralysed. The Swedish court ruled that since she had not protested he was off the hook for rape.
It is unheard of that the Swedish court goes after a man because a woman is pissed because he screwed around. Hunting him across the globe? We don't even do that with convicted killers!
Strange that we have an American deserter turning up so close to Assange getting here. I wonder if there will be two people on that plane back to the US of A.
Hello someone that doesn't understand that the system of justice in one country isn't the same in another country.
In Sweden, it has been established over and over in these debates, one cannot be charged with a crime unless they have been questioned in person.
He left the country before he could be questioned in person. Yes, one prosecutor decided there wasn't enough evidence at the time...and another said there was enough to question him. Even in the US, this happens all the time. And it is rarely politically motivated...
I wouldn't be surprised if the US had a part in this...however, I think that Assange had a MUCH bigger part...and I believe Sweden may just be following their own rules, even if the US likes that they are. if someone pisses me off and I see them jaywalking while a cop had his back to my enemy...I might just walk over to the cop and mention how dangerous it is for that guy to be endangering the cars going by and encourage them to follow the laws already there, if nothing more than to piss the guy off a little.
I don't think it takes any conspiracy to note the US is probably enjoying this as they know it is destroying Wikileaks. However, I don't think there is any nefarious plan to extradite him...especially as we have extradition treaties with the UK as well and could just as easily asked to bring him over with the caveat that we'd have to promise not to kill him...that's the only thing the UK asks...and I don't think the US could do this legally...much easier to kill him right where he was in the first place and even if everyone knew it was the US, we'd still have plausible deniability. That's the problem with you conspiracy theorists...you don't think of the simplest solutions. Occam's Razor...
Some points to notice, in case you care amidst your ad hominems and strawmen.
1. He didn't break the law. The women who he supposedly "raped" only got pissed because they found out Assange had sex with both of them. The other even tweeted how cool it was to meet Assange and how she couldn't "wait to meet the cool people [incl. Assange] again this evening" (this was following the "rape"). If you were really raped, would you be tweeting like that? No.
2. Assange did not flee. He was not told to stay. There was ample time to collect Assange, but nothing was done, so Assange left after several days. Once Assange went out of the country the Swedish prosecutor went apeshit. Assange become an Interpol wanted persona. Of course, this was according to plan.
The saddest part of Wikileaks is that even after they show irrefutable proof of war crimes and other nasty dealings, what is the reaction - people just chant their national anthem louder. That is sad and disgusting.
It's almost as disgusting as people fervently defending that massive system which conducts those kind of abuses on a daily basis.
He was given permission to leave Sweden. So he did. Then something weird and as yet unexplained happened and another prosecutor decided he was guilty of something without including the two women the original questioning had been about.
I've never heard of this "have to be in Sweden to be questioned by a prosecutor" before. Presumably neither Assange nor his lawyers have as well. The prosecutor was asked several times to come to London during the last 450+ days of house arrest but refused without saying why.
If a prosecutor is enough of a "judicial authority" (not in this country they aren't) to authorise a EAW then the Swedish embassy is Swedish enough to be a venue for questioning.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
If you're not a U.S. citizen you also have no constitutional rights
That's odd. I'm sure the fifth amendment begins with "No person". Not "No citizen of the US". Further to that, Article III asserts the supremacy of the US Supreme Court in applying the constitution to foreign citizens and amendment six refers to "the accused", not "the accused, if they happen to be born in the US and haven't pissed us off enough to ship them off to Guantanamo or add them to Obama's Kill List".
Just because you don't like the idea of justice doesn't mean it's not legally binding.
Sweden is not a lap dog of the United States.
Assange should show up in Sweden, get the case resolved, then go home. End of paranoid story.
I'm certain you are correct. What could possibly go wrong?
The Admin and the Engineer
Disclaimer: I'm a Swedish resident, and thus biased.
To answer your question; because Sweden has changed. At the time when the Egyptians were rendered, the Swedish population was convinced that Sweden was the best freest and marvelousest country the entire world. We simply didn't pay attention to things like this, because quite frankly we couldn't believe it would happen. The case of the Egyptians was a big eye opener for many here, and we were quite pissed off (well, as pissed off as Swedish people get).
The Assange case has, before anything really bad has even happened, attracted an enormous amount of publicity, and thus has the attention of every Swedish resident before it has even started (w/r to comparing it to the Egyptians). Some here may think Assange is an ass, some may think he should be put in prison and rot, and some may think he's innocent and/or a hero, but nobody seems to think that he should be given to the US. The public is keeping a very close eye on this case, and an extradition would be a political shit storm beyond anything we've seen for ages.
I'm honestly not particularly proud of how "my" country has acted in this - I can certainly see that the Swedish prosecution seems quite incompetent - but I really do not think that Assange would be dumped off the US. It would be political suicide for everybody involved in the process.
May we live long and die out
It makes him look guilty of the "not wearing a condom" charge. He should just go face the trial, especially since there's no way they can prove he's guilty (it's just her word vs. his).
Are you really naive enough to believe that's what ANY of this is about?
I guess I'm just as naive as cpu6502, because I believe this too. Honestly, my first thought on reading this was "urgh, that does NOT look good...guy looks like he's running for cover". Innocent or guilty, running off to South America has a strong appearance of someone trying to escape the law.
Do I think the U.S. government is completely ambivalent about the chap? Well, duh, of course they're likely to be somewhat annoyed. Do I think this entire shambles is some huge conspiracy? And that Sweden, of all places, is just going to roll over in acquiescence? Come on...
Assange is a creep. Looking at the whole "using force" bit, the "not using a condom when you knew full well the woman didn't want that" bit, the guy is a jerk and a creep. Yes, you might think he's a hero with Wikileaks. That doesn't mean he's not a creep. In some countries what he did would just get him branded a creep; in Sweden, they are a bit more adamant about protecting women's rights and they think he did something criminal.
If he doesn't like it and says the charges are without basis, well, man up and go back and fight the charges, and then bugger off to Ecuador or anywhere else you want to, in a fit of self-righteous pique. But the guy needs to take responsibility for his actions.
Personally I think half the reason he doesn't want to is because he's afraid he won't get yanked out to the United States. That would really damage his whole martyr/conspiracy victim image. Without that he's a seriously underwhelming and unprepossessing figure. He'll get prosecuted, he'll be freed, or he might serve some jail time, and in a few months or a few years he'll come out, not having been assassinated. But by then everyone will have forgotten about him.
I would agree with you - if you take the case against Assange in isolation, that is. But when you widen the scope of your consideration to the events surrounding Assagne at the time, and factor in the part where the judges dismissed the case and then mysteriously reopened it then you should get a better idea of why something more nefarious is going on.
The reason you're confused is because you're trying to find a direct analogue for 'charged' when there isn't any.
The way things work is that the police investigate a crime, and once they find a suspect they will inform him about their suspicions and ask him to come in for questioning.
This questioning can legally only be done physically in person, not by email, not by telephone, not by video-conference. If you do not come voluntarily then they will arrest you and bring you in for questioning instead.
After questioning you will then either be released (minor crime or suspicions withdrawn) or jailed (major crime or just afraid you'll flee the country) at which point the prosecutor will take the case to court. As you can imagine the jailing part of that gets really rather complicated if you try to do it through teleconference.
Sweden is a very bureaucratic country, this means that if procedure states things are to be done in this order, then they will be done in this order and few if any exceptions will ever be made for any reason.